- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/32470699
Today I’m talking to Joti Brar, one of the leaders of the Communist Party of Great Britain, the editor of the party’s publication, and the Spokesperson for the World Anti-Imerialist Platform.
Joti Brar of CPGB-ML is the daughter of the late Harpal Brar.
“Neutrality Studies” is some Swiss nonsense, but at least they’ll listen to communists and anti-imperialists.
They are a sectarian, anti China, anti Shia propaganda rag that manufactured consent for the destruction of Syria and Libya, yet I see plenty of posts of their articles here, particularly about Palestine, and yet I tolerate it and don’t report people for making such posts, because I don’t automatically assume the people posting are trying to promote sectarian, anti China views.
Also how do you interpret the rule, do you take it as meaning “We don’t want people with such views to be a part of this community and spread their views” or “We don’t want people with such views to even be mentioned in this community regardless of why”?
I dont think I agree with you here, when we post any large news org its with an understanding that its just a single slice of perspective on an issue - we should know better as communists that these orgs are always highly biased. Al Jazeera just tends to be the one we goto because it at least presents something closer to the center with the Palestine/Isreal conflict and has some inherent, but narrow value in understanding a vector of the situation. This doesnt excuse anything else they have done, and im sure most of us agree with that.
But with the CPG-ML party when we post stuff thats meant to be ‘on side’ it is seen more as an endorsement of an orgs views and should be held to a higher standard of critique otherwise we’re open to opportunist reactionaries trying to do entryism into us, our party lines are non-negotiable when it comes to trans people and that should go without saying.
These orgs are not only highly biased(which is to put it mildly) but mouthpieces/collaborators of fascist governments that have done great damage to plenty of the oppressed in the global south. These western media are as dangerous as the Patsocs because they have even a higher audience to reach to. Al Jazeera is one example and other examples are the BBC, Sky news and other western media. If the goal is not to allow reactionaries trying to do entryism into us or any fascists as mentioned by Red_Scare, I don’t we should be lenient with any of these western media as well.
Maybe, a warning might help to have a heads up of the author’s(such as CPGB-ML) disgusting views or to make this more productive you could share an alternative to keep the focus on the topic at hand.
I could say all those things about the BBC, the Guardian, etc, and yet there’s no rule against posting them. I already explained why I think right deviationists in particular are banned, I might be wrong, I didn’t wright those rules this is just how I understand them. This is also what makes sense to me, I think banning New York Times is counterproductive but banning Haz is not.
That is the point, you definitely can, and if we followed the rules the way you did, we’d be reporting every post made out of one of their pieces, that’s my point. We do not post anything with the assumption that we are uncritically endorsing everything that has ever been said by the source. And if we do so for some and not others, we give legitimacy to the ones we don’t try and ban from our discussions. If this is the intended way we follow these rules, I am much more uncomfortable with Al-Jazeera, Middle East eye, New York times and their ilk being seen as totally fair and productive to post articles from than whoever this small UK party member is.
Nazbols / patsocs pretend to be Marxist-Leninists and there are always some people around ML spaces who sympathise with them. There’s nobody here who thinks NYT present the correct Marxist-Leninist line.
If this was posted as “Inteview with Joti Brar the patsoc TERF” I wouldn’t report it, alas it’s posted as:
And Al-Jazeera pretends to be pro Palestine while they’re just a state propaganda mouthpiece who’s main goal is to get Sunni Muslims to believe everything they say about regimes that “Oppress the true faith”.
As much as I would like to see it, I don’t report posts from them that don’t add “Sectarian Reactionary News Media” added in the title. Because unlike the new york times, there are a lot of outlets who, due to their coverage of the genocide, have lulled many people into thinking they are upstanding and should be listened to. Another example for this is just recently we saw middle east spectator reveal themselves to be Anti-LGBT when they commented on Zohran Mamdani’s position on pride. Do we now ignore, report, and block every single thing they report on?
It’s not the fault of the user who posts it, neither does it break a rule. I take no issue with your discomfort at CPGB being reactionary, I believe so too.
However it is not against the rules (as they are currently, I do think they could be improved) to post something they say, as long as it is not directly endorsing the party or it’s reactionary views. I don’t see that here.